9/11 Open Thread

We're four years out: Thoughts, rants, spam, poetry?

Comments

[Ruthless]

Roses are red
Violets are blue

We're beginning Osama's second term.

[Uncle Sam]

Politicians are so predictable. I suggest that Osama's plan is going along much as he expected.

[Greg T.]

Uh-huh.

The Taleban removed from power. Safe and open haven in Afghanistan gone. Two thirds of al Queda leadership dead or captured. The Pakistani nuclear network disrupted. The first tentative steps towards democracy in Lebanon and Egypt.

Have you read what bin Laden thought would happen in the Middle East? Or is the fact that the U.S. faces a hard task in seeing the Iraq War through to good results enough to conjure up the notion that Osama is rubbing his hands together in a cave that has been his home for going on four years now...

[sage]

Don't forget 9/11 folks, as we "pray" for the "victims" of hurricane Katrina. They're both the same, you know. Only one boosted bush's approval, and the other helped to sink it.

[sage]

Bush is a disgrace

Five long years of cluster fucks

Is it oh-eight yet?

[Brooks Cowan]

To the best of my knowledge, Fox News Channel today was the only major domestic television channel which re-aired many of the horrendous events of 9/11/01 -- e.g., the planes hitting the towers, the explosions, the fire, the smoke, workers jumping to their death rather than burn alive, the aftermaths at the Pentagon and in a Pennsylvania field, the towers ultimately crumbling, and the then-shock of newscasters and stunned onlookers.

I was glad these graphic images were re-aired.

All other channels should have followed suit. We desperately need to be reminded of that pivotal day, and of how we felt, lest we as a society lose (any further) the focus and resolve required to eliminate our enemies.

[Ron Hardin]

It's time to forget it. Everybody who's interested is economizing it, seeing what they can get for themselves from it now.

What was revealed remains : the threat of modern weapons is too great now to co-inhabit the globe with 11th century governments.

It's not only in the US interest to change that, but everybody's.

So the plan is to make conditions inhospitable to terrorism everywhere. You don't stamp out terrorists ; but they can't get a foothold anywhere.

9/11 is a distraction from what is to be done

[ninjahippie]

sage,

You reflect on 9/11 and the first thing that pops into your head is Bush's poll numbers?

Tell me, how much lube does it take to get your head so far up your ass? Does it interfere with your bowel movements?

[Eryk Boston]

Here's my idea:
Sometime today spent just 10 minutes to remember the dead, give silent thanks to those who gave so much, and sometimes gave all, to help others.
Seriously, just 10 minutes of not being mad at anyone for anything. I'm sure many will be stunned at how it feels if you can even let yourself do it. You can go right back to hating Bush, Islam, FEMA or whatever object of ossessive antipathy you use to avoid thinking about your own life.
10 minutes, that's all I ask.
Eryk Boston

[David T]

Greg T.: "Uh-huh.

"The Taleban removed from power. Safe and open haven in Afghanistan gone. Two thirds of al Queda leadership dead or captured."

Yeah, well obviously Al-Qaeda needs a safe and open haven in Afghanistan. Without it, they obviously could not possibly conduct terrorist operations in Bali, Madrid, or London...

"Two thirds of al Queda leadership dead or captured"? Yeah, right. How many "number three men of al-Qaeda" are there for us to kill/cpature anyway? Somehow they seem to be able to launch terorist acts without these constantly-killed-or-captured "Number Thrree men"...

And let's not forget that they actually did bring down a government--in Spain. (OK, strictly speaking, it may have been not the bombing itself but the Spanish government's blaming the ETA that brought it down, but such nuances are lost to Al Qaeda--they see it as a victory and use it as a recruiting tool.)

But don't worry--when they strike here, the damage will be minimized by our effective evacuation plans. (I'd put a smiley here if it wasn't so tragic.)

[sage]

nipplehippie,

Actually I clicked to H&R from here, so that's what I was thinking of at the time. Of course, before that I was remembering where I was, much like I imagine others would do. But how can I bring up bush's poll numbers when it's 9/11, there's a war going on and we have a city to rebuild, right? Cockbite.

[Eryk Boston]

Well, I posted at 12:31 and the next bit of bombastic tripe came at 12:44. Did I get 10 minutes?

[Evan Williams]

Uncle Sam:

Do you know what his "plan" was? You should. After his mujahadeen used RPG's and other firepower to beat back one world superpower (USSR), they felt emboldened. Then, Bin Laden was embarrassed when Saudi Arabia turned down his offer to protect them from Saddam Hussein, and instead sought protection from GHW Bush. He took this as a personal slap in the face. So, embarrassed and emboldened, he looked for a way to do what he did to the Russkies: bring the fight to Afghanistan, where he could do the same to America. The idea was posed to him to fly planes into landmark buildings, and they set the plan in motion. It worked, somewhat: they did "bring the fight to Afghanistan". The second part, defeating yet another superpower on his home turf, didn't quite work out.

Look, I know it feels better to say, "every time you rob us of our civil liberties and bomb other countries, you play into Osama's plan", but, the fact is, as far as we know, the Patriot Act wasn't really on his to-do list.

The rape of our liberties in the name of "The War on Terra" is not bad because it plays into Osama's plan---it's just plain bad. There's no need to qualify it, it's just bad.

[Trey]

What a horrible thing that was, watching the second plane hit the tower and knowing then that it was no accident.

I think we haven't seen anything since because the bar for destruction was set very high on that day four years ago. They won't strike again until they can clear it.

Sadly, I believe something is coming (nukes?), and I don't know what to do about it beyond buying a gun and some gold.

[Greg T.]

"Yeah, well obviously Al-Qaeda needs a safe and open haven in Afghanistan. Without it, they obviously could not possibly conduct terrorist operations in Bali, Madrid, or London..."

Those operations - while financed to some extent by al Queda - were conducted by locally placed terrorists. One of the strengths of al Queda organizing principles is its de-centralized, umbrella structure. It's incredibly difficult to stop every terrorist attack but there are no longer thousands of jihadists going to Afghanistan to receive training for conducting terror operations in their countries of residence.

""Two thirds of al Queda leadership dead or captured"? Yeah, right. How many "number three men of al-Qaeda" are there for us to kill/cpature anyway? Somehow they seem to be able to launch terorist acts without these constantly-killed-or-captured "Number Thrree men"...

When the #3 person in an organization is taken out, someone replaces them. Should we start referring to replacements as the #4, #5, etc. so people won't get confused? Or perhaps we should do some version control: 3.1, 3.2...

In the four years since the 9/11 attacks, al Queda has hit mostly soft targets or used local assets to attack local targets. We haven't seen an attacked coordinated on the scale of 9/11 nor have we seen WMD used against any target.

Is your point that the U.S. hasn't succeeded in rooting out a highly decentralized organization spread across the globe that had years to finance and train thousands? Well, I would have to agree that total success has not been achieved. Then again, it never will be. If we found every major leader of al Queda tomorrow, other terror organizations would move to fill that void.

The primary goals of the war on Islamofacists are to -

(1) prevent terrorist networks from acquiring/using WMD
(2) disrupt terror networks capable of organizing and using a global organization and support structure to make large-scale attacks on U.S. soil and global interests

The U.S. will never succeed in stopping small cells of terrorists from blowing up a night club in Bali; we will likely fail to stop a small cell of terrorists from bombing a railroad station or mall in the U.S. Small scale terror attacks will continue to happen no matter how successful a relatively open society prosecutes the war on Islamofacists. They will continue to succeed in setting off bombs in public spaces. But, if the two major objectives list above are achieved, there will not be any large-scale attack that kills thousands or disrupts developed economies on a macro scale.

Do I think the U.S. government is doing a good job disrupting the terror networks capable of hitting the homeland? Sorta. The fact that we're dealing with people with a 14th century mindset helps but the evidence shows that al Queda has accomplished very little in the past four years - especially when you read what they state their desired outcomes of an open conflict with the U.S. are.

Do I think the U.S. government has done a good job of preparing the country to react quickly and effectively to a massive terrorist attack? Hell no. Events from the past two weeks show that the Feds aren't even organized to quickly respond to foreseeable disasters. If the terrorists succeed in causing the evacuation of one or more major metropolitan areas, the Feds will likely provide little help to millions of Americans that have paid billions of dollars for a coordinated, large-scale, and effective response.

But these are all secondary points. I was responding to a comment that stated the bin Laden would look back on the past four years and see that things are going according to his game plan. My response was intended to show that, despite the predictable incompetence of government on all levels, things have gone pretty well when viewed from a strategic perspective. The U.S. is doing a much better job of achieving its short- to mid-term goals compared to al Queda. OBL is on record with what he hopes al Queda would accomplish in this timeframe and he hasn't achieved much of his agenda. The occasional message from him and his #2 notwithstanding, his organization's standing in Arab world has taken a big hit in the past four years.

[Eric II]

I think Osama would call the last four years a mixed bag. On one hand, judging by his prior fanatasies of forming a Central Asian caliphate, the 9/9 assassination of Ahmed Shah Masoud, and his near-capture at Tora Bora, I don't think he counted on losing his safe harbor the way he did.

On the other hand, he has to be licking his chops at the opportunities provided to him by Dubya's Iraqi escapade. For recruitment, for training, for rallying Muslim public opinion, for satisfying death-cult bloodlust, for creating political rifts in the West, and perhaps even for creating a new safe harbor.

[dhex]

"We desperately need to be reminded of that pivotal day, and of how we felt, lest we as a society lose (any further) the focus and resolve required to eliminate our enemies."

some of us can close our eyes and remember without help from the television. thanks, though.

[dead_elvis]

Strategic lesson:

When war is declared on you

Best pay attention

Television off

I will not participate

I will walk my dog.

I will not let my

Patriotism become

A button they push

[Eric II]

I think we haven't seen anything since because the bar for destruction was set very high on that day four years ago. They won't strike again until they can clear it.

If Al-Qaeda's main objective, beyond the satisfying of its members' bloddlust, is to instigate Islamist revolutions in the Muslim world, then it's possible that they've decided that launching terrorist attacks in the US would be against their interests for now, given that their effect might be to increase public support for staying the course in Iraq.

At the same time, they could conclude that launching attacks in nations where the likely political effect would be to turn public opinion (further) against maintaining military involvement in that godfosaken country would make strategic sense.

[dead_elvis]

Since this stupid comment software got rid of the spacing, the above is grouped in 3 groups of 3 lines each.

[independent worm]

Wow. The GOP has absolutely UNLEASHED its Media Action Team today. Are they payig you guys extra to work on Sundays?

[anon]

I remember the faces of the missing on the fliers afterwards.

So many unburied dead.

[mediageek]

In light of trying to come up with something on my own, I will simply link to an essay* written by the late** Mark Penman:

Beavershots and Bloodshed

*Today it would be called a blog entry, but Penman was doing his shtick before the term was even around.

**Mark Penman, aka Laissez Firearm he killed himself around June of 2001. Despite his death, his essays still seem fresh, and at times eerily prescient.

[Curious]

What do you think would be sufficent provocation for the US to set off a nuke in the Middle East?

[Windypundit]

I remember watching the towers burn in real time as it was happening, and I remember wrestling with the fact that it was too late. No matter how rich and powerful and capable we are, we could never bring back all the people who were murdered by the crashing planes, by the roaring fireballs, and by the smoke filling the towers.

That must be what it's like to make a mistake with some fast-moving machinery and see half your hand fall to the floor: There's the pain, and there's the realization that it's irreversible and you can't undo it no matter how hard you try.

I did manage to find a little good news, though. Ramzi Yusef's boastful quest to bring the towers down had failed again. The towers may have been burning, and thousands may have been dead, but the towers still stood. That glimmer of hope lasted about 45 minutes, until I saw a huge dust cloud envelop one of the towers from top to bottom, and I figured out what had to have caused it.

[Septrina]

Bush was made by 9/11 and unmade by Katrina.

[mattc]

9/11 = conservatives get what they want

Hurricane Katrina = liberals get what they want

Arrgh.

That said, I've been in a constant state of melancholy ever since about 4pm, 9/11/01 when I woke up and turned on the TV. I remember the lines of cars waiting at gas stations up and down Manchester Rd. Its seems so ridiculous now, why were people so worried about getting gas? I had to work that night, and every damn TV in the unit was running 24 hr. news coverage. It was a pretty solemn night. I fucking hate 9/11 and its legacy.

[Ellis Wyatt]

Anyone who still thinks 9-11 was anything but an inside job is in deep denial of the facts.

>Kerosene does NOT melt steel (see your Coleman stove): the towers falling was a controlled demo. Do not try to say "softened" - it has been thoroughly refuted. No spin is possible.

>WT7 was a controlled demo, which ANYONE can see just by looking at ANY of the videos of it's collapse. No spin is possible.

>Flt 93 was shot down, it's debris scattered over 8 miles, which is completely impossible in the context of the official story that it crashed due to a fight over the controls. Furthermore, a close inspection of the "crater" shows plants growing INSIDE the crater, another impossiblity if the crater was created that morning thru collision. 93 was shot down, period. There is no way to spin it.

>There was no Boeing at the Pentagon, and a cursory overview of the many photos of the scene will show that there is no possible way it COULD have been a Boeing crash. There is no way to spin it.

Get over it.

Do not cite "eyewitnesses" - that is hearsay.

Do not cite "experts" - that is a fallacious appeal to authority.

Do not cite "incompetence" - the most "incompetent" were richly rewarded.

Do not cite the "Commission" - it was an obvious whitewash, and it's still an appeal to authority.

Do not cite "conspiracies" as being impossibly complex, or unprecedented - the official line is that some 20 "terrorists" (who can't fly planes, had their Saudi visas fast-tracked, and who don't show up on ANY passenger manifests) *conspired* with Osama (who was "living in a cave" in bumf*ck afghanistan) to pull off the single most sophisticated crime in American history. The official story is one of CONSPIRACY in the first place, ergo: the existence of conspiracies are central to the official line.

It is not my fault you are cowardly and unable to think for yourself. It is not my fault that you are being lied to by those you think are your righteous "protectors". It is not my fault that George Bush "won" and/or Kerry "lost".

Do not blame me for what you are feeling as you read this. Your feelings are YOURS, and only YOU are responsible for them.

9-11 was an inside job, a hoax.

Get over it. Get off your asses and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

I assure you that defenders of the government will be shown no particular mercy, because mercy is the fallacy of deferred justice. You WILL get EXACTLY what you DESERVE.

Deserve something better than tyranny, fools.

[Anon]

Every year I take the day off and spend it with my family...
I remember the pain of that morning, wondering if I'd be pushing my brother's coffin thru a church, he was on duty as a midtown NYPD patrol officer...
I watch the stories about the people, their loss, the great things done by ordinary people to help others they didn't even know...
Sometimes I still get choked up...
And somehow I don't ever think about politics...because my memories of that day have nothing to do with politics.

[Johnathan Reale]

I was driving from Millinocket to Machias, ME when it happened, on vacation with my wife and infant son, but my parents and most everyone else I cared about were in the city or elsewhere in my home sate of New Jersey. I was split apart, with relief on the one hand that my immediate family was so far away from the catastrophe, and horrendous guilt on the other that I wasn't there to share in my other loved ones' terror and helplessness.

While I don't think about it every day anymore, I am still grieving, and I am still murderously angry. I expect I still will be four years from now.

[Jim "My Whole Life's A Rimshot]

A Joke:

How do you circumcise an al Queda terrorist?

You can't...there's no end to those pricks...

Thank you, be here all week...

[Uncle Sam]

I don't think ObL gives a ... about the Patriot Act. I think he'd be willing to take a great loss, such as his life, to take the U.S down a notch or two.

He had to have grasped that the 9/11 attack would provoke the U.S. into doing something. He must have been aware of the PNAC web site explaining what the U.S. should do if only there was another "Pearl Harbor". First stop, of course, was Afghanistan. The next stop was revealed in the stated policy of two administrations calling for "regime change in Iraq.

The question is, how long can the U.S. endure the continuous drain on the treasury, the armed forces, and civilian morale, of occupying two far-off countries with loads of hostile Arabs?

[Uncle Sam]

Curse me for not using preview. I only wanted to bold something.

[Yogi]

Anyone who still thinks 9-11 was anything but an inside job is in deep denial of the facts.

Or still wisely taking thier meds.

[fcnolan]

Strange that no one has mentioned this:

By a joint resolution approved December 18, 2001 (Public Law 107-89), the Congress has designated September 11 of each year as "Patriot Day."

Like the name? Hate it? No opinion either way? Need to check with Huffington Post first?

[Uncle Sam]

I don't think there's a smart person anywhere in the world that thinks anyone could take on the U.S. in direct confrontation, therefore the U.S. must be taken on indirectly. A war of attrition may take more patience, but can do the job eventually.

[Tom Crick]

So it's been four years? ...Already? It seems like just yesterday! ...I wonder why.

...So how many more years do you think it'll take before all Americans are completely safe from terrorist attacks?

[Jason Ligon]

Air travellers should all learn Lightning Jujitsu. Apparently it worked in WWII?

[Eric II]

By a joint resolution approved December 18, 2001 (Public Law 107-89), the Congress has designated September 11 of each year as "Patriot Day."

Does anyone other than me find something pathetic and self-deprecating about this resolution? If you insist on using the date of a famous historical event to create a "Patriot Day" (as if Memorial, Veteran's, and the 4th weren't enough), shouldn't it be the date of some important national triumph? Maybe the date of Lexington or Yorktown or Midway - or even Fort McHenry.

Basing it on a day in which thousands of Americans were murdered and a famous national landmark destroyed by a group of student-visa zealots who could collectively be packed inside a Ford Expedition, and all in no small part due to government incompetence, is the kind of thing that you wouldn't even expect the Shi'as to embrace.

It's just one more example of how badly the American psyche, quite fear-ridden even in peaceful times, was shaken by that tragic day.

[Ruthless]

Eric II and others,
So does this place Patriot Day up there with Arbor Day and Sugar Candy Day?

Do our Congresspersons and Senators have cushy jobs or what?
Wait.
Is declaring Patriot Day like a step in a process like beatification on the way to Sainthood, as in time off with pay?
Then I see a tough sell coming seeing as how I think I very recently enjoyed the day of Saint Labor Unions. Correct me if I'm wrong. (Had such a good time.)
But, if Congresspersons and Senators are working to finagle us more time off with pay, then they deserve a raise.
joe, agitate for that.

[dhex]

"Does anyone other than me find something pathetic and self-deprecating about this resolution?"

i agree. i think this whole "soviet kitsch" thing has gone too far. first it was hep kats wearing fur hats and CCCP jerseys, now it's these over-the-top may day parade slogan type shits.

[Ruthless]

Jason Ligon,
Just looking at all this lightning jujitsu and dry-humping of carpets has caused my legs to be about as "give out" as Andre Agassi's must be now.

[jdog]

Like everyone else I was horrified by the murders of 9/11.

As an engineer, I was also deeply saddened by the destruction of the Twin Towers. These skyscrapers were built by hard-working rational people: architects, civil engineers, mechanical HVAC engineers, construction contractors, electricians, carpenters, and plumbers. This must have been the project of lifetime for many of them - something they could have looked back on with pride for their rest of their lives.

The towers were destroyed by gang of mystics who were too ignorant and lazy to know even how to begin building something remotely similar.

[Tom Crick]

"As an engineer, I was also deeply saddened by the destruction of the Twin Towers."

Watch out or Ruthless 'll have joe agitating for a national Architecture Day too! ; )

"...The towers were destroyed by gang of mystics who were too ignorant and lazy to know even how to begin building something remotely similar."

...and since they came down, we've been subjected to the ignorance of another gang of mystics who were...

...eh...it's too easy...never mind.

[Jack]

Eric II wrote: "If you insist on using the date of a famous historical event to create a 'Patriot Day' (as if Memorial, Veteran's, and the 4th weren't enough), shouldn't it be the date of some important national triumph?"

You forgot to mention Flag Day, June 14th: http://www.flagday.org/Pages/PausePage.html

[Brian]

Osama in his wildest dreams couldn't have imagined his plans would have gone so well. He's played Bush like a fiddle. Did he think we'd do something like invade Iraq? Could he have imagined such short-sightedness and incompetence? Maybe he knew more about Bush than we did with his 90% approval rating on 9/12.

The whole point of terrorism as a strategy is to cause your enemy (usually much stronger than you) to overreact and act irrationally and damage itself more than you ever could. Mission accomplished.

[Rick Barton]

Greg T. at 11:56 AM:

Or is the fact that the U.S. faces a hard task in seeing the Iraq War through to good results...

"Good results" is not an applicable term here cuz our government never should have attacked Iraq to begin with. Iraq posed no threat to us, but the American people were lied to and subjected to a massive neocon and government propaganda offensive to convince them otherwise.

[jw]

"Kerosene does NOT melt steel (see your Coleman stove)"

Excuse me, but yes, it can; if burned under the right conditions, most any hydrocarbon can produce a temperature high enough to melt steel and other ferrous metals. The fact that a Coleman stove does not melt when burning kerosene or as is usually the case, Coleman Fuel(similar to white gas), is proof of little more than good design. A potbelly stove does not melt when burning coal either, but coal (Pennsylvania anthracite) and coke (its derivative) were commonly used in the iron and steel industry. There are forging and foundry furnaces both that burn kerosene, fuel oil, natural gas or even propane. They can be made to actually melt steel.

As any steelworker, welder, or even blacksmith can attest, the problem in melting steel is not the producing of a high enough temperature (about 2300 to 2800 degrees F.),...the difficulty is keeping the metal from burning. A smith will tell you that if you heat steel that hot and expose it to the air, it will either burn like a Fourth of July sparkler or form a heavy oxide coating that insulates it. A welder will tell you that to melt or fuse steel, it must be covered with a flux of some kind or an envelope of shielding gas that does not support combustion.

If the structural steel in the towers was actually melted rather than merely softened, I rather think that the operative heat probably came from the burning planes themselves rather than the fuel. Modern planes are built of aluminum and magnesium alloys, which will both burn at a hellish heat once they ignite. In an enclosed building the burning fuel would easily produce enough heat for that. Burning magnesium and aluminum are highly oxygen reactive , so much so that they will literally suck the oxygen out of not only air and steam, but even metalic oxides such as iron oxide (rust and iron ore.) This would have robbed the oxygen from the air and permitted the steel to melt instead of burn. It is a process known as the Thermite reaction and is used for welding the ends of railroad rails together in place, among other things. The temperature easily reaches 5000 degrees F. (Thermite charges also do a nice job when dropped down the barrels of the enemy's anti-aircraft guns, too!)
One more thing: it was said that the structural beams were covered with a fire-retardant but that it was not sufficient to protect them from sustained heat. However, it may have been sufficient to protect them from the air and allow them to melt rather than burn.
The first tyrany to overcome is ignorance (the lack of knowledge.

He that welds iron in a wood fire may acomplish anything!

[jw]

"Kerosene does NOT melt steel (see your Coleman stove)"

Excuse me, but yes, it can; if burned under the right conditions, most any hydrocarbon can produce a temperature high enough to melt steel and other ferrous metals. The fact that a Coleman stove does not melt when burning kerosene or as is usually the case, Coleman Fuel(similar to white gas), is proof of little more than good design. A potbelly stove does not melt when burning coal either, but coal (Pennsylvania anthracite) and coke (its derivative) were commonly used in the iron and steel industry. There are forging and foundry furnaces both that burn kerosene, fuel oil, natural gas or even propane. They can be made to actually melt steel.

As any steelworker, welder, or even blacksmith can attest, the problem in melting steel is not the producing of a high enough temperature (about 2300 to 2800 degrees F.),...the difficulty is keeping the metal from burning. A smith will tell you that if you heat steel that hot and expose it to the air, it will either burn like a Fourth of July sparkler or form a heavy oxide coating that insulates it. A welder will tell you that to melt or fuse steel, it must be covered with a flux of some kind or an envelope of shielding gas that does not support combustion.

If the structural steel in the towers was actually melted rather than merely softened, I rather think that the operative heat probably came from the burning planes themselves rather than the fuel. Modern planes are built of aluminum and magnesium alloys, which will both burn at a hellish heat once they ignite. In an enclosed building the burning fuel would easily produce enough heat for that. Burning magnesium and aluminum are highly oxygen reactive , so much so that they will literally suck the oxygen out of not only air and steam, but even metalic oxides such as iron oxide (rust and iron ore.) This would have robbed the oxygen from the air and permitted the steel to melt instead of burn. It is a process known as the Thermite reaction and is used for welding the ends of railroad rails together in place, among other things. The temperature easily reaches 5000 degrees F. (Thermite charges also do a nice job when dropped down the barrels of the enemy's anti-aircraft guns, too!)
One more thing: it was said that the structural beams were covered with a fire-retardant but that it was not sufficient to protect them from sustained heat. However, it may have been sufficient to protect them from the air and allow them to melt rather than burn.
The first tyrany to overcome is ignorance (the lack of knowledge.

He that welds iron in a wood fire may acomplish anything!

[jw]

"Kerosene does NOT melt steel (see your Coleman stove)"

Excuse me, but yes, it can; if burned under the right conditions, most any hydrocarbon can produce a temperature high enough to melt steel and other ferrous metals. The fact that a Coleman stove does not melt when burning kerosene or as is usually the case, Coleman Fuel(similar to white gas), is proof of little more than good design. A potbelly stove does not melt when burning coal either, but coal (Pennsylvania anthracite) and coke (its derivative) were commonly used in the iron and steel industry. There are forging and foundry furnaces both that burn kerosene, fuel oil, natural gas or even propane. They can be made to actually melt steel.

As any steelworker, welder, or even blacksmith can attest, the problem in melting steel is not the producing of a high enough temperature (about 2300 to 2800 degrees F.),...the difficulty is keeping the metal from burning. A smith will tell you that if you heat steel that hot and expose it to the air, it will either burn like a Fourth of July sparkler or form a heavy oxide coating that insulates it. A welder will tell you that to melt or fuse steel, it must be covered with a flux of some kind or an envelope of shielding gas that does not support combustion.

If the structural steel in the towers was actually melted rather than merely softened, I rather think that the operative heat probably came from the burning planes themselves rather than the fuel. Modern planes are built of aluminum and magnesium alloys, which will both burn at a hellish heat once they ignite. In an enclosed building the burning fuel would easily produce enough heat for that. Burning magnesium and aluminum are highly oxygen reactive , so much so that they will literally suck the oxygen out of not only air and steam, but even metalic oxides such as iron oxide (rust and iron ore.) This would have robbed the oxygen from the air and permitted the steel to melt instead of burn. It is a process known as the Thermite reaction and is used for welding the ends of railroad rails together in place, among other things. The temperature easily reaches 5000 degrees F. (Thermite charges also do a nice job when dropped down the barrels of the enemy's anti-aircraft guns, too!)
One more thing: it was said that the structural beams were covered with a fire-retardant but that it was not sufficient to protect them from sustained heat. However, it may have been sufficient to protect them from the air and allow them to melt rather than burn.
The first tyrany to overcome is ignorance (the lack of knowledge.

He that welds iron in a wood fire may acomplish anything!

[jw]

Sorry about the tripple post. Damned computer!

[raymond]

(fair use. From The Economist, Sept 10 2005)

The following is from the Letters page of The Economist. The letter is about an article comparing jihadists with anarchists (in history, not the "h&r ruthless" kind). (my bold)

SIR - Osama bin Laden and the anarchists who preceded him are hardly unique when it comes to justifying the slaughter of civilians to further their goals. Sovereign governments have long made a practice of "total war"; not least the allies in the second world war whose bomber pilots had little difficulty rationalising the destruction of civilian homes after the strategic targeting of military and industrial installations became too difficult. Sir Arthur "Bomber" Harris justified it at the time by noting it was better to drop a bomb anywhere in Germany than none at all. When we go to war, whether as part of a nation-state or as part of a disaffected minority, we commit ourselves to the atrocity of murder. Whether we confine ourselves to hitting "legitimate" targets at that point is merely a matter of semantics. All nations have done this and will do so again when they feel the need to. Moralising against those who return the favour is as much human nature as it is hypocrisy.

Bill Coffin
Oakhurst, New Jersey

[Isaac Bartram]

Kerosene does NOT melt steel (see your Coleman stove):...

Steel loses its ability to support loads at about 800 degrees, far below its melting point.

You do not have to melt the steel in a building for it to collapse. That is why steel beams and columns are sprayed with a fire resistant coating.

Unfortunately the coating will usually not survive an impact or a sustained fire. It's supposed to delay collapse until evacuation can be completed. In the WTC the fire was so intense and the impact so severe that collapse came sooner than expected.

[wellfellow]

I like how it's an 'inside' conspiracy, they're dastardly enough to do something like that, and clever enough to hide it from everybody, but darn it if they couldn't link it to Saddam.

[Isaac Bartram]

...they're dastardly enough to do something like that, and clever enough to hide it from everybody,... but they can't load up Iraq with "found" WMDs (or is it WsMD).

[jw]

Isaac Bartram and Wellfellow:

Excellent points!

[The Wine Commonsewer]

Wilson Elementary School held a scripted 09-11 program on Friday. While Jake's 4th grade class sang a rather forgettable patriotic tune, Katie's second grade class belted out a rousing rendition of American Soldier that got them a standing ovation and more than a few hankies dabbed at the teary eyes of the 150 (or so) parents that skipped work to be there at 9:15 am sharp. (video cameras in hand).

Wilson is a multi-racial, multi-ethnic upper-middle-income school in suburbia with a black principal. It also serves a few minority kids from the poorer side of the freeway. Those parents were there too.

I'm not sure what all that means but it was a long way from the gate at Crawford or the walk in DC. Maybe this IS America.

[Shawn Smith]

>WT7 was a controlled demo, which ANYONE can see just by looking at ANY of the videos of it's (sic) collapse. No spin is possible.

The Sun goes around the Earth every 24 hours, which ANYONE can see just by looking at the sky ANY day of the year. The Earth only moves during an Earthquake, and then only a little bit. No spin is possible.

[guy in the back row]

Well, at least the most recent 90 day ultimatum is almost up, I think the end date was October 9th.

[wtc survivor]

What a bunch of assholes.

[Ellis_Wyatt]

The Sun goes around the Earth every 24 hours, which ANYONE can see just by looking at the sky ANY day of the year. The Earth only moves during an Earthquake, and then only a little bit. No spin is possible.

At reason.com, no-one can cite the logical fallacies contained in the above?

The heliocentric model was developed through observation, and the obvious differences between the (then) conventional wisdom and observable fact.

The postulate that the earth also moves, as per the heliocentric model, is also derived from observation.

You TRIED spin, but as I said, no spin is possible. Not half-baked pleas to false premises, nor a thousand eyewitnesses or crying mothers. Only the facts matter.

Excuse me, but yes, it [kerosene/jet fuel] can [melt steel]; if burned under the right conditions,

Yes, such as an oxygen rich environment. In fact, you need to ADD oxygen to do what the writer claimed, and ANYONE can look at the schematics to said smelters (et al) and confirm this. No spin is possible on the foundry floor either, fella.

However, omitting for a moment the firemen whom I have on tape saying there were small fires and they only needed "two lines" (ie: hoses) to put them out, and omitting the Windsor Torre in Madrid (that fire that raged for 10hrs in a steel-frame building that didn't collapse, like every other steel frame building fire in recorded history), let's simply ask: were the WTC towers an oxygen-rich environment?

Two words: black smoke.

Some more words: see the pics of the people standing in the hole in the side of the building, where the alleged "800 degree" fires were.

No sir, you are shilling, and poorly.

To the person who cited my spelling error ["it's"], thank you - I've been making that one for years and you were right to correct me.

Or still wisely taking thier meds.

I lost several friends that day, which is why I sought to discover the reason. You can kindly go shove it up yer keister. Murder is murder.

The first tyrany to overcome is ignorance (the lack of knowledge.

Does the word "epistemology" mean anything to you?

The lack of knowledge is your own, sir. Possibly you should get your knowledge from sources other than the cereal box that is CNN. Try starting with a cursory overview of the morality of the State. Jefferson will do nicely. To wit, have you read anything by former Nebraska State Senator John DeCamp? Anything about GOP fundraiser Larry King prostituting minors to sitting GOP legislators?

No? Didn't bother gaining any knowledge about that, did you?

Reason, indeed!

Four years on, and STILL you haven't figured out how it happened. Open your frikken ears, folks. Osama (CIA code name "Tim Osman" - look it up) has been in bed with the Bushes crime cartel for decades (see: Arbusto - look it up).

Look it up. Look it up. Look it up. Look it up... everything I've said is confirmable from countless sources, if only you'll look.

Get over yourselves. The steamroller that is the second American Revolution will not stop to humor your illusions.

[Ira Weatheral]

Ellis,

From my own observations it appears "they" are more a bunch of screw-ups than evil geniuses who can keep their underling's toungues shut four years after the fact.

Are politicinas slime bags who have sex with kids and line their own pockets? Of course they are. Did they set up this apple cart knockover to take over? Dude, they were already in charge and doing fine, why bother with killing people who were paying them hundreds of thousands in taxes each year?

But thanks for looking out, who knows, maybe you're right, or might be right in the future!

[ira]

shucks, politicinas=politicians

[Ellis Wyatt]

From my own observations it appears "they" are more a bunch of screw-ups than evil geniuses who can keep their underling's toungues shut four years after the fact.

I like "T.H.E.Y." - it helps keep perspective on the reality of the (dis)organization. 😉

However, appearances can be deceiving. For example, it's well established that Pearl Harbor was NOT a "surprise" to several in the DoD.

The latter question was answered in the affirmative on October 30, 2000, when President Bill Clinton signed into law, with the support of a bipartisan Congress, the National Defense Authorization Act. Amidst its omnibus provisions, the Act reverses the findings of nine previous Pearl Harbor investigations and finds that both Kimmel and Short were denied crucial military intelligence that tracked the Japanese forces toward Hawaii and obtained by the Roosevelt Administration in the weeks before the attack.

Good ole Roosevelt had the radars dismantled, and it is rather obvious (and proven) that such was intentional. What a GREAT MAN! They kept their underlings tongues shut for nigh 50 years... except that they didn't! See Sibel Edmonds. See Randy Glass. See Andreas Von Beulow.

As you can see, or hopefully will see, the claim that it would be "impossible" to keep the secret is fallacious, because the secret wasn't kept. The ONLY part of whistleblowing that DIDN'T occur was major media reporting. I have spent years researching this (since March 2002, as I believed the official version at first), but I promise you... there are HUNDREDS of people with INSIDER knowledge detailing EXACTLY what they know, and backing it up with internal documents, and more importantly (tho I could care less about law or courts, as I'm a rationalist) affidavits.

Right? People are risking libel/slander/treason charges (if not assassination) to get this information to you, and not one has been found guilty yet. Why? Because the facts support them.

As I said above, murder is murder, state-sponsored or otherwise. I doubt you would say that Rodney King was a "terrorist", and that the kops who beat the hell out of him were "liberators". You might, but I'd be curious about what definitions you were using.

If GWB is IN ANY WAY an accomplice to 9-11, that's 3,000 2nd degree murder charges in NY that he should face, as I think NY has no death penalty, and hence no 1st degree murder. See Mark Chapman.

Are politicinas slime bags who have sex with kids and line their own pockets? Of course they are.

"Of course"? WHAT?!?!

So... you advocate no criminal charges for child rape? I'm an Autarchist (Rule by Self of Self), so I don't need a court to decide for me, but for those of you who do plea to the authority of a Court, how the hell are you going to justify NOT prosecuting them?

FWIW, as appaling as it sounds, child rape is the least of their crimes. When it comes out what they did to hide EM energy discoveries (see T. Townsend Brown's PATENTS, et al), the millions dead from "oil wars" take on an entirely different pallor.

Did they set up this apple cart knockover to take over? Dude, they were already in charge and doing fine, why bother with killing people who were paying them hundreds of thousands in taxes each year?

When you answer that question, a great deal about the nature of the State will become clear to you.

And you might research whether the taxes are paying for anything notable. Cheney, for example, is profiting in the tens of millions from the Halliburton no-bid contracts his office has been instrumental in authorizing.

What, no conflict of interest charges? Martha Stewart serves a year (in Club Fed, admittedly), but Cheney gets off scot-free?

Sir, the double standard is not mine. There is no such thing as a legitimate power monopoly, tho that is exclusively what all States claim to be.

maybe you're right, or might be right in the future!

I may be wrong about a great many things, which would be consistent with my life at large, but the core facts of 9-11 are not among them. This is not a dogma. I do not accept conspiracy on faith - it is simply the required action of they (plural) who would have you believe something false.

I would apologize for hijacking this thread, but I'm on topic, and what I am saying y'all had better learn and fast. Feds rolling thru N'orlins confiscating guns is a direct violation of the 2nd amendment, and THAT ALONE makes this government unconstitutional. THAT ALONE makes those who support this government in any way the very essence of "anti-american".

Got that? It's the informed dissidents who are the patriots, and I am certainly one of them.

The buck stops right here, right now, with me rovoking my consent for their actions in my name. Implicit in that is that I must stand by my revokation fully, in all it's aspects, with all it's consequences.

Such is morality, if it is to have any factually utile definition at all.

Be well.

[Ellis_Wyatt]

Censoring much, buddy? Durned shame that. Rational inquiry is willing to listen to any evidence, and I have plenty.

What's sadder is that you know it, yet won't post my last comment, or at least not any time soon.

[Ellis_Wyatt]

Yup, a 20 paragraph post, filled with links, down the memory hole.

Get used to it, folks. The fallacious dare not allow dissent.

[Ira Weatheral]

I remembered!

[dayton]

I knew that!

[shox]

The fallacious dare not allow dissent.

[Gucci clothes]

Exactly why you might ask, well you may want to sell a product or service and target webmasters or simply just improve the quantity of backlinks your web site has which will improve your Google rankins which will then bring your web site more traffic and cash. Take a fast take a look at this website for more information.